This lady named Gina Henry allegedly owed Chase Bank some money. It made collection calls to her and Henry sued for TCPA violations.
Chase countersued Henry for the debt owed and Henry moved to dismiss the claim.
In Henry v. JP Morgan Chase, 2025 WL 91179 (N.D. Cal. Jan 14, 2025) the court denied this effort and allowed the bank to chase Henry for the debt.
Reasoning that the claim for the debt is related to the same operative facts as the phone calls at issue in the TCPA claim– the calls were made to collect the debt after all– the Court had little trouble concluding the two claims should proceed in one suit.
The Court also rejected the idea that allowing counterclaims might dissuade TCPA suits– Chase is free to sue Henry for the debt in state court regardless. So doing it all in one place will be easier for Henry in the Court’s view.
TCPA suits against debt collectors and servicers are at an all time low right now as Plaintiff lawyers focus their energies on origination and marketing callers. Still it is important to keep in mind that an occasional debt collection TCPA suit might still be filed–especially if prerecorded calls or RVM is used– and when they are pursuing the debt in a counterclaim is a splendid idea.
Nice work Chase.